Robert Bennett: Reduce the shrillness level of political rhetoric

Comments

Just how pragmatic is allowing the President to run up the
national debt to 17 trillion dollars? Then a few years ago when Obama actually
talked to the Republicans, he gives the finger (literally) to Paul Ryan. Why
would you want your country to be run into that kind of debt by what you call
Democrat leadership. And don't say Bush or Republican, Obama has added 7
trillion in less than 5 years. Explain that. Plus we don't even have a
good economy out of it.

GaryOVirginia Beach, VA

March 20, 2014 6:50 a.m.

2bits – You’re talking ancient history. The SDS and weather
underground no longer exists, and neither does the Viet Nam War, but the Tea
Party is still very much a plague.

I was characterizing the
Democratic Party as a whole. Sure there are outliers, but for the most part, the
Dems are pragmatists, and the Repubs are ideologues.

Flashback - Sure
Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi and everyone else who voted for the ACA are
pragmatists. Thank goodness for Democrats in leadership positions.

J ThompsonSPRINGVILLE, UT

March 18, 2014 7:03 p.m.

UtahBlueDevil,

4,000 delegates? The Senate has 100 members. Those
100 people decide who will sit on the Supreme Court, what treaties will be
honored and whether the President, if convicted, will stay in office. The House
has 435 members who are charged with writing all the laws of the land, yet you
object to having ten times that number elect candidates from those who were
nominated!

Is it that you think that Utahns are too stupid to do
their duty according to the law? How many delegates have ever been arrested for
anything? How many members of Congress have been arrestest? How about our own
Allen Howe? Do you think that talking with less than ten people is too large a
job for a delegate, yet you expect 435 members of the House to understand every
line on every bill before voting?

The system works. There are many,
just like you, who throw stones, yet when the issues are understood, the
objections are nothing but nonsense, in comparison with the duties of other
elected officials.

Tonight the Democrats hold their caucus meeting.
Are they incapable to do their duty? Why?

2 bitsCottonwood Heights, UT

March 18, 2014 3:28 p.m.

GaryO said, "Extremists are rare within the Democratic Party. With the
Republicans though, extremism is the rule"....

===

Gary, what about the Weather Underground (WUO)? Google it. The leaders of
that group are now leaders in the Democrat party and the community organizer
groups created to fund and advance the Democrat agenda.

Google
"Students for a Democratic Society (SDS)" Or "Occupy
Wallstreet" or "PETA" or "ALF", "Days of rage",
"Chicago 7", etc...

All Democrat groups. Radicals. They
declared war on the United States.

The known members of the WUO have
successfully re-integrated into mainstream society, without necessarily
repudiating their original intent. And are active Democrats today.

Bill Ayers - teaches at Chicago U (and was Barry Obama's mentor).Bernardine Dohrn - still married to Bill Ayers and a Democrat Activist.Jeff Jones - Currently an environmental activist in NY. He is also working on
the board of the financial arm of Movement for a Democratic Society (MDS), a
group that works closely with the new SDS.

Read the whole article on
the Weather Underground in Wikipedia if you aren't familiar with it. The
known members have integrated into today's Democrat party.

Don't pretend there are no Radical Democrats...

UtahBlueDevilDurham, NC

March 18, 2014 3:26 p.m.

Mike…. from the State of Utah site…

"In Utah,
delegates have a lot of sway politically. As a delegate you are one of 4,000 or
fewer people (in some races as few as 80) who decide who will be your
party’s nominee in this year’s elections."

You point
is 6% isn't enough? Not representative enough? How about 4,000 from a
state of 2.8 million. That comes out to being about 1/10 of 1 percent. So if
6 percent is invalid… surely 0.143% is….

"A caucus is
simply a meeting. In this case you (yes, you) meet with your neighbors of the
same party. Here, your neighborhood (or precinct) chooses you (and some of your
neighbors) to be state and county delegates who will represent your
precinct."

Surely you getting together with "select"
neighbors is hardly the right way to get a sampling of Utah voter sentiment. In
fact, if you look at polling data from UtahDataPoints, most Utahns don't
trust the caucus system. It isn't a representative system… it is a
good old boys club in its more perfect form.

When you judge
people based on your stereotypes for them (especially 60 year old stereotypes at
that)... you would rarely be right in your assumptions about people. That may
be why you and OMM have such a wacky view of Utahns.

===

We should really stop judging people... especially based political stereotypes
(not always correct) and 60 year old stereotypes at that (even less likely to
correctly guide your judgements of them).

Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, Utah

March 18, 2014 11:21 a.m.

atl134,

Apparently you haven't read the emails sent to every
registered Republican and you haven't visited the official web page for the
Republican caucus. If you had, you would have seen that you don't need to
be in attendance at the caucus to be part of the caucus.

I can attend
but my neighbor is in a hospital. Tomorrow when I visit him, I'll
encourage him to voice his opinion using the methods allowed for those who
can't be in attendance.

When something like this
misunderstanding can be so easily corrected by simply reading the email that you
receive as a registered Republican, I'm wondering why anyone would tell us
that opinions will not be heard if they can't attend a caucus meeting.
Saying that you have to be in attendance at a caucus meeting is misleading.

Every Republican has a voice if they simply do their duty and become
active in the Republican Party. I receive emails several times a week that keep
me informed. If you're registered, you will receive those emails too. If
you're not registered, then why would you comment about the Republican
caucus?

marxistSalt Lake City, UT

March 18, 2014 10:30 a.m.

If you grew up in Utah in the 1950's you can't help but notice how the
Utah brand of right wing politics hasn't changed much, though the labels
are different - JBS to tea party. There is one major change though - black
female running for congress! In the 1950's that was beyond imagination.

2 bitsCottonwood Heights, UT

March 18, 2014 9:31 a.m.

Baron Scarpia,This did not start with Obama. This did not start with some
questioning Obama's birth certificate. Remember people in the media
mis-representing Bush's military record? I remember some news anchor
loosing his job over it. Remember some people on the right trying to dig up
scandals on Bill Clinton? I do. Remember people on the left digging up
scandals to take down Reagan? I do.

It didn't start with Obama.
It goes way back, and on both sides.

And the Obama question
wasn't from mainstream Republicans, it was a small group of radicals (both
sides have their groups of conspiracy nuts).

===

On
Democrats ranting that Republican candidate is selected at convention (skipping
the primary if they have over 60% support)....

More Democrats skip
the primary election than Republicans (but more than 2-to-1). It's very
rare for a Democrat to have to mount a Primary campaign in Utah (because they
generally run unopposed). Jim Matheson faced one primary campaign in his whole
political career (went straight to the general election every other time).

So Democrats whining about Republicans not facing a primary is the
kettle calling the pot black IMO.

atl134Salt Lake City, UT

March 18, 2014 9:19 a.m.

@Mike Richards" It is not the fault of the caucus system that so few
citizens are responsible."

It is the fault of the caucus system
that everyone who is working during the hours of that caucus have no ability to
vote. At least a primary gives a 12 or so hour window where most should be not
working at some point during that span.

marxistSalt Lake City, UT

March 18, 2014 9:13 a.m.

@2 bits "Of course there are no leftists or Democrats with extreme views...
No environmental extremists (Tim Dechristopher and PETA are examples). No
Abortion extremists. No Marxists."

I'm a Marxist and I am
not extreme. You know how we think and feel is in large part determined by the
facts and details we are willing to pay attention to. An example of this, from
my point of view, is the inability of right wingers to focus on the increasingly
top heavy distribution of wealth. Anyone who takes time to study this comes
away alarmed (and amazed because it is so extreme) because of the threat it
poses to democracy and the middle class standard of living. But one does have
to focus on it at least for a few moments.

factspleaseSLO, CA

March 18, 2014 9:05 a.m.

@flashback"Reagan signed into law the Firearm Owners Protection Act,
which was supported by gun rights advocates. In addition to providing
protections for gun owners, the act also banned ownership of any fully automatic
rifles that were not already registered on the day the law was signed.

In a 1991 New York Times op-ed titled "Why I’m For the Brady
Bill," Reagan detailed his support of a seven-day waiting period for gun
buyers. "Every year, an average of 9,200 Americans are murdered by handguns,
according to Department of Justice statistics," Reagan said in the op-ed.
"… If the passage of the Brady bill were to result in a reduction of
only 10 or 15 percent of those numbers (and it could be a good deal greater), it
would be well worth making it the law of the land."(Politifact)

It appears to me that Republicans aren't very well informed as to
what happened while Reagan was in office.

2 bitsCottonwood Heights, UT

March 18, 2014 9:01 a.m.

OwenHeber City, UT

RE: "Using Ann Coulter as an example of
reducing shrillness"....

Ann Coulter is no worse than Rachael
Maddow, Bill Maher, and many others... this is not a one-sided problem like you
pretend. Both sides have the same problem. If you can't see that...

===

T. Party,You can not like Ronald Reagan. LDS
Liberal said HE likes Reagan, and he pontificated that tea party people
don't like Reagan... so since his opinions (which are based on his heart
felt stereotypes for others) are always true... you can't like Ronald
Reagan.

Sorry.

===

And as GaryO of Virginia
Beach, VA points out...

"Comparing the bizarre extremism of the
Republican Party to the general mindset of the Democratic Party is absurd. The
Republicans are the Party of ideological extremists".... "The Democratic
Party, by contrast, is the Party of pragmatists"...

Of course
there are no leftists or Democrats with extreme views... No environmental
extremists (Tim Dechristopher and PETA are examples). No Abortion extremists.
No Marxists. No labor union extremists (hint.. Occupy Wallstreet)... oh no...
there are no extremists on the left... only the Right wing...

FlashbackKearns, UT

March 18, 2014 8:59 a.m.

Gary O, this is too easy. When has Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi ever been
pragmatists? Two of the most shrill voices in the Democrat party. Same with
Chuck Shumer, Sheila Jackson Lee, Henry Waxman, Marsh, Leahy, Biden, Feinstein,
Boxer, Bernie Sanders (Oh sorry, he's an "independent" who caucuses
with the dems), and the list goes on and on and on and on and on.

The
Democrats are not pragmatists. They want the power and don't want to give
it up and will do anything to keep it. Why do you think Obama keeps illegally
messing with the ACA? He wants to protect Democrats and keep them in power.

In the immortal words of Nancy Pelosi, "We have to pass it to see
what's in it."

I rest my case. Thank you.

FlashbackKearns, UT

March 18, 2014 8:36 a.m.

Open Minded Mo, that was Clinton that banned handguns and assault rifles.
Reagan never did such a thing.

Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, Utah

March 18, 2014 8:11 a.m.

UtahBlueDevil,

You make it sound like the "system" is at
fault because a "few" voters elect the delegates. How many voters are
invited to the Republican Caucus? ALL OF THEM. It is not the fault of the
caucus system that so few citizens are responsible. If we used your logic, then
we would have to throw out the Primary election, because only 6% of eligible
voters participate in that election.

The caucus system is a pure form
of a Democratic Republic. You advocate a pure Democracy. We are not citizens
of a Democracy. We are citizens of a Democratic Republic. The caucus system
allows us to elect delegates whose job it is to talk to each candidate and then
to elect a candidate whose qualifications most closely match the wishes and
ideals of the precinct.

When only 6% of the voters participate in the
primary election, how many voters do you think even know the names of all the
candidates on the ballot? Do you want a popularity contest to determine the
outcome of the election? Do you want a "rock star" in Congress or do
you want someone who is qualified?

UtahBlueDevilDurham, NC

March 18, 2014 7:15 a.m.

Mike..... everything you say is very factual. No arguments there.

But lets be really clear.... there is a delegate system. The few select who
these delegates are. While I live in NC now, my family and myself have deep
linkage to Utah politics. My uncle with whom we were very close served in
various elected offices in the state, as well as a Congressman for the state of
Utah in the House of Representatives. So I am relatively clear on the
process...

But the point is the caucus system is out dated and not
needed It was designed in a day when communications was a problem. Today, that
is not the case. There is no reason the Republicans can't have a
Republican only primary where the voting public decides directly.... not through
the filter of a delegate system..... who represents them.

I
don't think the delegates themselves are evil, bad people, I know more than
a few of them. I just don't think they represent the average person. You
summarize the problem yourself...that somehow a select few people decide what a
"republican" is... which doesn't match reality. Let the people
decide... all the Republicans.

LDS LiberalFarmington, UT

March 18, 2014 6:43 a.m.

Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, UtahUtahBlueDevil,

The
"reward" for failure was to be fired as one of our State's
representatives in the Senate.

Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill (the liberal Speaker of the House during
Reagan's presidency) were good buddies, wining and dining together
regularly. While they staunchly opposed each other's politics, they got
things done, often drawing on their mutual Irish heritages as a bond that
encouraged them to establish lasting friendship and respect.

While
we can all debate the merits of their compromises and drive to get the business
of State done, it did created an era of significant milestones that eventually
shaped a path of economic prosperity and national pride (post Nixon and
stagnation eras of the 1970s).

From Obama's first election, you
had a general narrative from his GOP opposition to undermine the President, from
promoting falsehoods about his birth certificate to Mitch McConnell's
declaration that the GOP's objective should focus on making Obama a
one-term president. America's interests were now less important than
working with the President to rescue America from two unpopular wars, the Great
Recession, and restoring America's standing in the world.

The
GOP has really nothing to show except be the "party of no," and shrill
infighting appears to be their ongoing legacy...

marxistSalt Lake City, UT

March 18, 2014 12:33 a.m.

Two Republicans are responsible for Northern Utah's excellent transit
system - Mike Leavitt who made the deal with Union Pacific to get hundreds of
miles of right-of-way cheap; and Robert Bennett who got the funding. I
don't like Republicans per se, but give credit where its due.

Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, Utah

March 17, 2014 7:04 p.m.

UtahBlueDevil,

Those citizens who were responsible enough to do their
duty to attend a caucus meeting elected delegates who were charged with vetting
all candidates. The caucus meeting is the first of three times in Utah that
citizens must preform their civic duties. Your "location" shows that
you have no say in how Utah political parties select our candidates. Those of
us who attended our precinct caucus meetings fulfilled the first step required
in Utah. Mr. Bennett lost our confidence. We elected delegates who had not
sworn allegiance to mr. Bennett. We voted for people who knew their job was to
vet all candidates. Mr. Bennett was found to be lacking when his record was
compared to the principles of the Republican Party. He and he alone was
responsible for his failure to be re-elected. He failed to do his job as
expected. The "reward" for failure was to be fired as one of our
State's representatives in the Senate.

GaryOVirginia Beach, VA

March 17, 2014 4:36 p.m.

Comparing the bizarre extremism of the Republican Party to the general mindset
of the Democratic Party is absurd. The Republicans are the Party of ideological
extremists. And the RINO designation applies to Republicans who don't
score quite high enough on the extremism meter.

The Democratic Party,
by contrast, is the Party of pragmatists, and the DINO designation DOES NOT
exist there. That's a figment of Bennet's imagination. He would like
to believe that the Dems are as crazily ideological as the Repubs, but it just
is not so. Extremists are rare within the Democratic Party. With the
Republicans though, extremism is the rule.

Bennet is a Conservative,
and like Moderates and Liberals, true Conservatives believe that government can
be a positive and productive tool. That's why the founders gave us the
Constitution. It's the template for our government, and our government is a
tool designed to help Americans achieve success. However the modern Republican
Party, more reactionary then conservative, is dominated by people who distrust
and hate government.

No one should be surprised that when
government-hating Tea Partiers are elected into public office, they immediately
set about demonstrating just how bad government can be.

jsfCenterville, UT

March 17, 2014 4:21 p.m.

They taught that conservatives should never compromise with those on the
"other side." Ever hear a democrat say they will cross the aisle to get
things done? Nope. But do from republicans all the time.

jsfCenterville, UT

March 17, 2014 4:18 p.m.

policies which allowed spying on citizens, IRS under Obama and CIA under Bush
and Obama.

made it harder for opponents to vote, voter id laws fought
against by the party, that requires id for party meetings and to obtain services
under obamacare lies and says voters would be turned away for not having
id's they themselves require.

anti-immigration laws, union
busting legislation, democrats during the same period as the Nazis.

anti-environment and science legislation sorry this was not the position of
the Nazis who promoted science they agreed with. Like eugenics. Of course we
hear of the liberals calling for the wholesale arrests and imprisonment of any
one that says man made global warming is not reality.

ultra
conservative education, not the position of the Nazis, who wanted state control
of the schools and all to be equal in education.

Anyone who spoke
against Obama is immediately labeled an enemy to the state and a racist.

HookyRiverton, UT

March 17, 2014 4:15 p.m.

Oh Robert Bennett...when it comes to standing for true principles (as opposed to
standing for nothing whatsoever) shrillness is necessary, even required.

T. PartyPleasant Grove, UT

March 17, 2014 4:03 p.m.

@The Real Maverick "...Hitler's NAZI party..."

According
to Godwin's law, this debate is now over. Your invocation of Hitler throws
victory to the conservatives. It is sadly ironic that you made the losing move
while commenting about shrillness in political rhetoric. Thank you for playing,
and better luck next time.

The Real MaverickOrem, UT

March 17, 2014 1:12 p.m.

Hitlers NAZIs believed in being louder and more obnoxious than any other group.
They taught that conservatives should never compromise with those on the
"other side." They passed policies which allowed spying on citizens,
made it harder for opponents to vote, anti-immigration laws, union busting
legislation, anti-environment and science legislation, ultra conservative
education, and unlimited military spending.

To pass this
legislation, Hitler used beautiful women and loudmouths on radio to spew
propaganda. Anyone who spoke against him was immediately labeled an enemy to the
state.

Now let me ask you, which party today most resembles
Hitler's NAZI party?

We need to change our political climate.
Unfortunately, I think one party needs to become worse before it can be purged
and brought back to sanity.

T. PartyPleasant Grove, UT

March 17, 2014 11:33 a.m.

@UtahBlueDevil "Who decided the Tea Party gets to decide the principles for
the entire Republican party...?"

No one. I don't even belong
to the Republican party. I can only tell them how they should conduct themselves
if they want my vote.

@LDS Liberal "They do not like Ronald
Reagan..."

That's just nonsense. I loved Ronald Reagan.
I've already told you why. He never left any question about his principles.
Your characterization of him as a RINO is flat-out incorrect.

LDS LiberalFarmington, UT

March 17, 2014 10:55 a.m.

And what was Ronald Reagan's 11th Commanadment people?

"Thou
shalt not speak ill of any Republican."

The evidence is quite
clear,Tea-Partiers do not know Ronald Reagan, They do not like
Ronald Reagan, Reagan was a RINO, and they can't come to terms with
that -- They just see him as a winner, and can't ascertain why or how
he did it.[answer -- compromising]

BTW --

I served
under Ronald Reagan. I voted for Ronald Reagan. I knew Ronald
Reagan. Ronald Reagan was a hero of mine. Senators Mike Lee &
Ted Cruz, you're no Ronald Reagan!

UtahBlueDevilDurham, NC

March 17, 2014 10:26 a.m.

Mike... Mr. Bennett was not voted against by the people of the state of Utah.
He never was on the ballet. His ouster was just about a open and free market as
was the vote this week in Crimea. The people never had the option. It was a
minority of voices within the party that decided the people of Utah
shouldn't have that option. The caucus system doesn't trust the
people of Utah.. the Republican elite choose for people who they should vote
for.

T. Party you say they can compromise and still keep
"their" principles... but yet you see when ever they don't agree
with your principles.. they are RINOs. Who decided the Tea Party gets to decide
the principles for the entire Republican party - and they they alone arbitrate
what party purity and principles is. If the tea party is so right... rather
hijack another party, they should become their own. The Tea Party has no right
to tell other Republicans if they are pure enough.

JoeBlowFar East USA, SC

March 17, 2014 9:55 a.m.

I suppose that he only ACTED like he raised taxes?

Or that he only
acted like he added over 250,000 govt workers (fed non military employees was
bigger under Reagan than today)

Or was only Acting when he said

"We are going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that have
allowed some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. They
sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing when a bus driver was
paying 10 per cent of his salary and that's crazy. Do you think the
millionaire ought to pay more taxes than the bus driver?

Or that he
was "acting" when he championed gun control legislation in Washington or
instituted a 15 day waiting period in California.

Today, any of those
things would have him labeled as much worse than a RINO and would absolutely
disqualify him for president in the eyes of the right.

gmlewisHouston, TX

March 17, 2014 9:34 a.m.

Pres. Reagan:1) ACTED like he was working with the liberals2) ACTED
like he was compromising3) ACTED like he was increasing the size of
government

Hey, it was a talent.

T. PartyPleasant Grove, UT

March 17, 2014 9:16 a.m.

@Open Minded Mormon "Reagan was definately [sic] a RINO"

I
see you don't know anything about it. A man can work with the other side
and remain true to principle. It's when he abandons his principles that he
becomes a RINO.

Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, Utah

March 17, 2014 9:15 a.m.

Senator Bennett seems to think that it is the Government that appoints people to
elected office. Does he not know that THE PEOPLE elect all members of Congress
and THE PEOPLE choose what "kind" of people they want to represent them
and the States in which they live. Mr. Bennett was removed from office by
Republicans who found him ineffective and non-productive. It was the
Republicans who attended all of their political meetings who made that
difference; it wasn't the "vino's" (voters in name only) that
removed him from office. Those who cared enough to fullfil their duties as
citizens removed him from office. The Senate had no say in the matter.

Mike Lee is making a difference. Orrin Hatch is doing nothing except
sending out emails telling us what a good job he is doing. I've received
several.

Congress is expected to uphold all of the Constitution all
the time. If it takes "shrillness" to remind everyone of their duty,
then let there be "shrillness".

Open Minded MormonEverett, 00

March 17, 2014 8:06 a.m.

"My colleagues in the Senate tell me that the more incendiary members there
have either toned things down a bit or been isolated after the bitter debate
over the government shutdown."---Senator Bennett is making
mention of the "New and Improved" Mike Lee and Ted Cruz, who's
kinder and gentler more 'compassionate' approaches after their stupid
Government Shut-down debacle back-fired BIG time.

FYI -- Reagan
was definately a RINO --

Compromising and WORKING with Democrats to
get things done, banning handguns and assult weapons, signing
abortion legislation, granting amnesty to illegal immigrants, proving universal medical treatment in ERs, regardless of insurance or ability
to pay, increasing Government size AND spending, increasing the debt
17 times, signing more executive orders than any U.S. President since
WWII.

Yes -- Reagan was 180 degress total opposite virtually
everything these Tea-Partiers who worship him think.

T. PartyPleasant Grove, UT

March 17, 2014 8:04 a.m.

@Bailout Bob

First, don't attribute sentiments to your political
opponents that they don't have. Today's tea party would be on the side
of reform, not cronyism. Cronyism is what you were doing, and it's the
reason you were thrown out.

Second, if the RINO shoe fits,
you're going to have to wear it.

JoeBlowFar East USA, SC

March 17, 2014 7:53 a.m.

RINO. What a confusing term.

What is a true Republican?

Is it Mitch McConnell or is it Ted Cruz?

If one is a staunch small
government fiscal conservative but supports gay marriage, are they a RINO?

Wasn't Reagan a RINO?

It appears to me that today, a
RINO is anyone who does not adhere 100% to the party ideology. And
someone who does that will not win a national election.

America
does not want strict, hard right conservatives. There needs to be some
flexibility.

The Tent is small and shrinking. Not a good sign for
the party.

EsquireSpringville, UT

March 17, 2014 6:49 a.m.

Democrats will often have differences amongst themselves, but they don't
try to kill each other off over ideological purity as do the Republicans.
Sadly, the GOP has lost its voice of reason and ability to govern. When
Republican political leaders come out on a stage with a gun and brag about it,
it is clear that they are the servants of special interest groups, and not of
the people of this country.

UtahBlueDevilDurham, NC

March 17, 2014 5:59 a.m.

Of course I think Bennett is spot on here.... and you know there are many who
feel he is still just spoiling after his loss several years ago. And there is
probably truth on that point as well.

But the recent election in
Florida was a great example of what he is talking about. Both candidates from
both parties spoke of "fixing" the Affordable Care Act... not the usual
polarized rhetoric we are so used to now days. It showed that both parties are
getting the point that the American public is fatiguing of the constant
bickering, and lack of meaningful progress.

So I hope Bennett is
right. I hope the pendulum is swinging back from the edges. I hope the
Republican party is pulling back from its silly rhetoric, and gets back to being
the party of a lean, highly efficient government that delivers more for less -
for the citizens - and not just corporate interest.

OwenHeber City, UT

March 17, 2014 12:18 a.m.

Using Ann Coulter as an example of reducing shrillness. She who characterizes
immigrants as ""warm bodies." She who describes all Dems as
Treasonous, Godless and Demonic. Really Senator?